An RF mount L macro lens will be announced alongside the high-megapixel EOS R camera

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,546
1,981
You may have damaged the front element on your TSe 17L...sure I can make mine flare but it's probably the lowest amount of flare I've seen on a lens and very easy to fix. I find the TSe 17L remarkably low in flare considering how much the front element sticks out.
There are multiple components to what we call flare. The TS-E 17 shows strong flare artifacts (‘ghosting’) with a bright light source in the frame or just outside of the frame. Most of my use of the lens is blue hour shooting in urban settings, and I always check the live preview for flare artifacts from streetlights just out of the frame, and block them with a flag or my hand. However, the veiling glare (diffuse loss of contrast from that bright light source) is very well controlled.
 

Chaitanya

EOS 6D MK II
Jun 27, 2013
1,085
171
33
Pune
Macro lens for travel?
I used to pack Eos 500D(before shutter failed) with 18-270mm and 100mm L for travel needs and if the RF 24-240mm lens is good then I will be purchasing RP with 24-240mm and RF equivalent of 100mm L as my travel kit. I shoot butterflies and flowers(native plants only). Which is why Macro lens is a necessity for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Quarkcharmed

PureClassA

Canon since age 5. The A1
Aug 15, 2014
1,636
226
Mandeville, LA
Shields-Photography.com
While the idea (as per neuro) of the built in ring light would be outstanding, I wonder if a wider aperture would be useful. My experience with macro work is very limited, but it seems like anything you are shooting that close would require a much more stepped down aperture than f2. Seems like most macro I see gets shot at 5.6 or 8 or deeper just to even get a DOF of an inch or two because of the focusing proximity. Again, I never really dove into macro much. Would be curious to hear other opinions from those who have
 

scyrene

EOR R
Dec 4, 2013
2,459
318
UK
www.flickr.com
My bet would be on a FF macro lens with built-in light, as some have mentioned above. As usual, most people speculate based on what they'd like to see, not what they think is most likely. It does entirely depend on what line Canon is taking, however...

Canon's lens push with the Rf mount is quite clearly top end pro. So I doubt if this new rumored lens is anything mass market / consumer grade.
...and this is the flipside - they have already released some rather niche lenses before much in the way of consumer ones, so maybe it'll be something exotic. Depends how big a market high-end macro work represents. Even in that case, I'd imagine longer telephoto constitutes a tiny minority - I'd have thought product photography was the more common professional application. Regardless, it'll be interesting.

And fwiw if I were to choose a couple of macro lenses I'd personally love to see, however unlikely, I'd go for an updated MP-E with IS and more than 6 aperture blades, and a 200mm f/2.8 or wider aperture IS macro telephoto.
 

Pape

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2018
358
211
I hoping RF teleconverter i could use with EF 70-300mm :) its nice lense with focus stack ,no focus breathing. 400mm f5,6 macro would be super cool if without focus breathing.
would need only one lense for bugs and birds and some small flora.
 

scyrene

EOR R
Dec 4, 2013
2,459
318
UK
www.flickr.com
While the idea (as per neuro) of the built in ring light would be outstanding, I wonder if a wider aperture would be useful. My experience with macro work is very limited, but it seems like anything you are shooting that close would require a much more stepped down aperture than f2. Seems like most macro I see gets shot at 5.6 or 8 or deeper just to even get a DOF of an inch or two because of the focusing proximity. Again, I never really dove into macro much. Would be curious to hear other opinions from those who have
Short answer, it depends. Diffraction is an issue - the higher the magnification, the more it's apparent, so shooting the MP-E beyond ~f/6.3 is trading off detail for DOF, especially beyond 1x mag (in my opinion). For focus stacking, shooting wide open (or stopping down only a little) offers the best solution, and I assume a wider native aperture would allow for even better results in that regard. Additionally, alhough this is more relevant to lower magnification, i.e. no more than 1x, shooting wide open for blurred backgrounds at lower magnification can help with subject separation, especially useful (again imho) for insects, flowers, etc. Either way, a wide aperture gives more options - however I don't see us going much beyond f/2.8 simply because it'll make the lens too bulky and expensive. *Maybe* f/2 at a shorter focal length, say 50mm. But that's less useful to me (though would make a nice portrait lens on the side) - and maybe too similar to the expisting 35mm f/1.8.
 

Gazwas

EOS M50
Sep 3, 2018
26
7
You may have damaged the front element on your TSe 17L...sure I can make mine flare but it's probably the lowest amount of flare I've seen on a lens and very easy to fix. I find the TSe 17L remarkably low in flare considering how much the front element sticks out.
We obviously all photograph things very differently then. My lens is fine and has had flare and some distortion from new. If I shoot interiors downlighting causes flare, my Bron flash heads flare if too close to the edge of the frame, windows at the edge of a frame can even cause flare. Not just flare spots but contrast reducing flare.

Standatd practice for me is to use mine with a Lee wide angle lens hood but this limits the movements or I have to use flags next to the lens.

I own all the Canon TS-E lenses and I’d just like to see a redesign in RF to address some of its unique handling characteristics compared to all the others which are faultless.
 
Last edited:
Sep 12, 2019
2
2
Please not an LED ring or a tilt-shift! Keep it lightweight and make the quality at least equivalent to the current 100mm macro. Faster than ƒ2.8? Don't need it. I use my macro lens to shoot macros, usually between ƒ11 and ƒ22. In some cases I open up to 3.5 to isolate a subject in vivo from its background.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jasonmc89

keithcooper

EOS 7D MK II
Ah, yes. You’re looking for a conversation piece, while I’m looking for a macro lens for use in the field. :)
No, the field is the last place I want to use mine - indoors only ;-)
That's why I'm hoping it won't be yet another 'normal' lens with macro.
'Proper macro' please - loads of magnification and none of this infinity focus nonsense (OK, the Laowa 25mm relay lens does 2x and focuses to ∞ , but that's just too weird for Canon)
 

peters

EOS T7i
Dec 25, 2017
79
70
Not my professional work...
that list would stymie 75% of my paying work ;-)

Missing from my POV are:
8-15 zoom fisheye
wide TS-E (24)
very wide TS-E (17)
MP-E65 equivalent
Oh thats a very interesting lineup. I guess you are working in some kind of architecture topic?
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,366
775
Some people have trouble grasping the notion of significance.
With some people you can't even explain it or demonstrate it with pictures. All they see is that camera A has a higher DxO score than camera B so naturally you can't even make snapshots with camera B. As a professional you must have A, you must have that score!
 

keithcooper

EOS 7D MK II
Oh thats a very interesting lineup. I guess you are working in some kind of architecture topic?
Yes architecture, interiors and industrial - I do macro work as well, mainly electronics related (so no flowers/insects/fungi)
I have one long lens, a 70-200 2.8L IS ;-)
These are my main reasons that I've no business interest in video, and AF performance (and high ISO) are things largely of interest from the spec sheets ;-)
 
  • Like
Reactions: peters

PureClassA

Canon since age 5. The A1
Aug 15, 2014
1,636
226
Mandeville, LA
Shields-Photography.com
Short answer, it depends. Diffraction is an issue - the higher the magnification, the more it's apparent, so shooting the MP-E beyond ~f/6.3 is trading off detail for DOF, especially beyond 1x mag (in my opinion). For focus stacking, shooting wide open (or stopping down only a little) offers the best solution, and I assume a wider native aperture would allow for even better results in that regard. Additionally, alhough this is more relevant to lower magnification, i.e. no more than 1x, shooting wide open for blurred backgrounds at lower magnification can help with subject separation, especially useful (again imho) for insects, flowers, etc. Either way, a wide aperture gives more options - however I don't see us going much beyond f/2.8 simply because it'll make the lens too bulky and expensive. *Maybe* f/2 at a shorter focal length, say 50mm. But that's less useful to me (though would make a nice portrait lens on the side) - and maybe too similar to the expisting 35mm f/1.8.
Never done focus stacking, but on my bucket list. But that makes sense if that’s what you’re doing and a shallow Dof doesnt matter except for the fact Id assume you’d have to take even more photos to stack.
 

Quarkcharmed

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
455
304
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com
DPReview repeatedly says that the A7r4 has the first "new" FF sensor from Sony since 2015. (Sony reuses sensor tech? I thought only Canon did that. Sony is doomed!) So the A7r4 has the very latest tech Sony can deliver. And high ISO is not only roughly the same as the A7r3, it's roughly the same as the 4 year old 5Ds in my closet.
5Ds still lags behind in terms of the noise but not too much. A7RIII is the cleanest.

Today's sensors are incredibly efficient photon counters and there are no easy gains left to be made. Not unless you want to strip the color filter array completely or use active cooling. If you're shooting crop and want better high ISO the next shiny new model isn't going to do it. Go FF. If you're shooting FF and want better high ISO, better start looking at recent MF systems.
I expected A7RIV's noise to to be on par with A7RIII but higher resolution. It's a new sensor tech after all and they promised a lot. But it's worse even after normalising to the same size. The sharpness isn't very indicative there because they used different lenses on A7RIV and A7RIII (as a DPR guy explained in the comments below).

So I'm disappointed with Sony but will wait for what Canon offers. Moving to MF isn't an option, it'll never pay off as a workhorse and too expensive as a toy. With Sony at least I can pay an extra $600 for an adapter and keep my lenses, with MF I'll have to spend about $5-10k on MF lenses, plus the camera itself.
 

Jethro

EOS R
Jul 14, 2018
206
92
180mm macro WITH IS would be good!

Dream butterfly lens!
Part of me would love a 180mm (or even a 150mm) - with IS - but I fee like anything over 100mm is going to send the price towards the stratosphere. A 100mm f2 (or f2.4 or even f2.8) without IS would be plenty good for me. Built in LEDs would be a bonus.
 

Jasonmc89

EOS 80D + 100-400mm mkii
Feb 7, 2019
126
90
UK
Part of me would love a 180mm (or even a 150mm) - with IS - but I fee like anything over 100mm is going to send the price towards the stratosphere. A 100mm f2 (or f2.4 or even f2.8) without IS would be plenty good for me. Built in LEDs would be a bonus.
I wouldn’t expect a 180mm f2 or anything! Although you never know what patent will show up at the moment.. A low cost 150mm f4 weathersealed true macro lens with IS would interest me! I’m not a fan of built in LEDs really, just no replacement for speedlites and softboxes!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pape and Jethro